| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: No Bug: accept discards socket options/O_NONBLOCK |
| From: | Raul Miller <raul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 15 Sep 2000 12:38:35 -0400 |
| Cc: | matthias.andree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <200009151401.HAA09979@pizda.ninka.net>; from davem@redhat.com on Fri, Sep 15, 2000 at 07:01:32AM -0700 |
| References: | <20000915150125.A8057@emma1.emma.line.org> <200009151254.FAA09729@pizda.ninka.net> <20000915155731.A8677@emma1.emma.line.org> <200009151401.HAA09979@pizda.ninka.net> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2i |
On Fri, Sep 15, 2000 at 07:01:32AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > Every Linux inetd in the world would instantly stop working. Pointer to docs on why this is not considered a bug in inetd? Also, you already know how to upgrade a syscall without breaking backwards compatability. > The behavior is not changing, lets end this thread right now. I'm not trying to say the behavior must change -- I'm trying to find out why it won't. ["I don't see the need", is something that I'd accept. However, "it would break inetd" doesn't make sense.] -- Raul |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [2.4][2.2] Bug: accept discards socket options/O_NONBLOCK, kuznet |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Preallocated skb's?, Donald Becker |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: No Bug: accept discards socket options/O_NONBLOCK, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [2.4][2.2] Bug: accept discards socket options/O_NONBLOCK, kuznet |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |